Total Posts:89|Showing Posts:1-30|Last Page
Jump to topic:

The legal drinking age should be 18

Ore_Ele
Posts: 25,980
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/10/2010 2:17:20 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 11/10/2010 2:13:26 PM, gavin.ogden wrote:
If you can vote for our policy makers, you should be able to buy a drink. Opinions?

I don't see how those logically tie together.
"Wanting Red Rhino Pill to have gender"
gavin.ogden
Posts: 1,729
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/10/2010 2:19:43 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 11/10/2010 2:17:20 PM, OreEle wrote:
At 11/10/2010 2:13:26 PM, gavin.ogden wrote:
If you can vote for our policy makers, you should be able to buy a drink. Opinions?

I don't see how those logically tie together.

Why should society trust the judgement of someone to change the course of a nation, but not trust them to take a drink for another 3 years? Why should they be allowed to make a life or death decision, like join the military, but not be able to make a decision to catch a buzz?
innomen
Posts: 10,052
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/10/2010 2:22:24 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 11/10/2010 2:19:43 PM, gavin.ogden wrote:
At 11/10/2010 2:17:20 PM, OreEle wrote:
At 11/10/2010 2:13:26 PM, gavin.ogden wrote:
If you can vote for our policy makers, you should be able to buy a drink. Opinions?

I don't see how those logically tie together.

Why should society trust the judgement of someone to change the course of a nation, but not trust them to take a drink for another 3 years? Why should they be allowed to make a life or death decision, like join the military, but not be able to make a decision to catch a buzz?

You know that during the Vietnam war it was reduced to 18, because the argument was, if you could die for your country, you should be able to order a beer. A couple years after the war, in the 80's it incrementally went up. One year 19, next 20, next 21. Guess who turned 19, 20, and 21 in perfect sync?
Ore_Ele
Posts: 25,980
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/10/2010 2:22:40 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 11/10/2010 2:19:43 PM, gavin.ogden wrote:
At 11/10/2010 2:17:20 PM, OreEle wrote:
At 11/10/2010 2:13:26 PM, gavin.ogden wrote:
If you can vote for our policy makers, you should be able to buy a drink. Opinions?

I don't see how those logically tie together.

Why should society trust the judgement of someone to change the course of a nation, but not trust them to take a drink for another 3 years? Why should they be allowed to make a life or death decision, like join the military, but not be able to make a decision to catch a buzz?

I agree, let's raise the voting and military age, lol.
"Wanting Red Rhino Pill to have gender"
Ore_Ele
Posts: 25,980
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/10/2010 2:23:13 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 11/10/2010 2:22:24 PM, innomen wrote:
At 11/10/2010 2:19:43 PM, gavin.ogden wrote:
At 11/10/2010 2:17:20 PM, OreEle wrote:
At 11/10/2010 2:13:26 PM, gavin.ogden wrote:
If you can vote for our policy makers, you should be able to buy a drink. Opinions?

I don't see how those logically tie together.

Why should society trust the judgement of someone to change the course of a nation, but not trust them to take a drink for another 3 years? Why should they be allowed to make a life or death decision, like join the military, but not be able to make a decision to catch a buzz?

You know that during the Vietnam war it was reduced to 18, because the argument was, if you could die for your country, you should be able to order a beer. A couple years after the war, in the 80's it incrementally went up. One year 19, next 20, next 21. Guess who turned 19, 20, and 21 in perfect sync?

I'm guessing you.
"Wanting Red Rhino Pill to have gender"
gavin.ogden
Posts: 1,729
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/10/2010 2:24:33 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 11/10/2010 2:22:40 PM, OreEle wrote:
At 11/10/2010 2:19:43 PM, gavin.ogden wrote:
At 11/10/2010 2:17:20 PM, OreEle wrote:
At 11/10/2010 2:13:26 PM, gavin.ogden wrote:
If you can vote for our policy makers, you should be able to buy a drink. Opinions?

I don't see how those logically tie together.

Why should society trust the judgement of someone to change the course of a nation, but not trust them to take a drink for another 3 years? Why should they be allowed to make a life or death decision, like join the military, but not be able to make a decision to catch a buzz?

I agree, let's raise the voting and military age, lol.

Fair enough. Is that your true opinion? I'm looking for some real insight...
innomen
Posts: 10,052
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/10/2010 2:24:54 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 11/10/2010 2:23:13 PM, OreEle wrote:
At 11/10/2010 2:22:24 PM, innomen wrote:
At 11/10/2010 2:19:43 PM, gavin.ogden wrote:
At 11/10/2010 2:17:20 PM, OreEle wrote:
At 11/10/2010 2:13:26 PM, gavin.ogden wrote:
If you can vote for our policy makers, you should be able to buy a drink. Opinions?

I don't see how those logically tie together.

Why should society trust the judgement of someone to change the course of a nation, but not trust them to take a drink for another 3 years? Why should they be allowed to make a life or death decision, like join the military, but not be able to make a decision to catch a buzz?

You know that during the Vietnam war it was reduced to 18, because the argument was, if you could die for your country, you should be able to order a beer. A couple years after the war, in the 80's it incrementally went up. One year 19, next 20, next 21. Guess who turned 19, 20, and 21 in perfect sync?

I'm guessing you.

good guess :-0, I probably should have waited.
Ore_Ele
Posts: 25,980
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/10/2010 2:30:56 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 11/10/2010 2:24:33 PM, gavin.ogden wrote:
At 11/10/2010 2:22:40 PM, OreEle wrote:
At 11/10/2010 2:19:43 PM, gavin.ogden wrote:
At 11/10/2010 2:17:20 PM, OreEle wrote:
At 11/10/2010 2:13:26 PM, gavin.ogden wrote:
If you can vote for our policy makers, you should be able to buy a drink. Opinions?

I don't see how those logically tie together.

Why should society trust the judgement of someone to change the course of a nation, but not trust them to take a drink for another 3 years? Why should they be allowed to make a life or death decision, like join the military, but not be able to make a decision to catch a buzz?

I agree, let's raise the voting and military age, lol.

Fair enough. Is that your true opinion? I'm looking for some real insight...

If someone's reasoning is that it is because of personal maturity and responsibility, then it would be hypocritical to allow for military admission or voting, but not drinking.

If arguments are based on liver and brain development, then that does not relate to voting or military admission.
"Wanting Red Rhino Pill to have gender"
gavin.ogden
Posts: 1,729
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/10/2010 2:37:01 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 11/10/2010 2:30:56 PM, OreEle wrote:
At 11/10/2010 2:24:33 PM, gavin.ogden wrote:
At 11/10/2010 2:22:40 PM, OreEle wrote:
At 11/10/2010 2:19:43 PM, gavin.ogden wrote:
At 11/10/2010 2:17:20 PM, OreEle wrote:
At 11/10/2010 2:13:26 PM, gavin.ogden wrote:
If you can vote for our policy makers, you should be able to buy a drink. Opinions?

I don't see how those logically tie together.

Why should society trust the judgement of someone to change the course of a nation, but not trust them to take a drink for another 3 years? Why should they be allowed to make a life or death decision, like join the military, but not be able to make a decision to catch a buzz?

I agree, let's raise the voting and military age, lol.

Fair enough. Is that your true opinion? I'm looking for some real insight...

If someone's reasoning is that it is because of personal maturity and responsibility, then it would be hypocritical to allow for military admission or voting, but not drinking.

If arguments are based on liver and brain development, then that does not relate to voting or military admission.

So, do the liver and brain develop at different rates from ages 18-21? Well, perhaps the brain, but certainly not the liver. Also, you don't believe the brain should be fully developed before someone is allowed to vote?
innomen
Posts: 10,052
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/10/2010 2:47:04 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 11/10/2010 2:37:01 PM, gavin.ogden wrote:
At 11/10/2010 2:30:56 PM, OreEle wrote:
At 11/10/2010 2:24:33 PM, gavin.ogden wrote:
At 11/10/2010 2:22:40 PM, OreEle wrote:
At 11/10/2010 2:19:43 PM, gavin.ogden wrote:
At 11/10/2010 2:17:20 PM, OreEle wrote:
At 11/10/2010 2:13:26 PM, gavin.ogden wrote:
If you can vote for our policy makers, you should be able to buy a drink. Opinions?

I don't see how those logically tie together.

Why should society trust the judgement of someone to change the course of a nation, but not trust them to take a drink for another 3 years? Why should they be allowed to make a life or death decision, like join the military, but not be able to make a decision to catch a buzz?

I agree, let's raise the voting and military age, lol.

Fair enough. Is that your true opinion? I'm looking for some real insight...

If someone's reasoning is that it is because of personal maturity and responsibility, then it would be hypocritical to allow for military admission or voting, but not drinking.

If arguments are based on liver and brain development, then that does not relate to voting or military admission.

So, do the liver and brain develop at different rates from ages 18-21? Well, perhaps the brain, but certainly not the liver. Also, you don't believe the brain should be fully developed before someone is allowed to vote?

I don't think the worries are about the liver/cirrhosis, but rather the maturity that differs between the ages of 18-21. The cost of permitting are greater than the benefits.
gavin.ogden
Posts: 1,729
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/10/2010 3:00:26 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 11/10/2010 2:47:04 PM, innomen wrote:
At 11/10/2010 2:37:01 PM, gavin.ogden wrote:
At 11/10/2010 2:30:56 PM, OreEle wrote:
At 11/10/2010 2:24:33 PM, gavin.ogden wrote:
At 11/10/2010 2:22:40 PM, OreEle wrote:
At 11/10/2010 2:19:43 PM, gavin.ogden wrote:
At 11/10/2010 2:17:20 PM, OreEle wrote:
At 11/10/2010 2:13:26 PM, gavin.ogden wrote:
If you can vote for our policy makers, you should be able to buy a drink. Opinions?

I don't see how those logically tie together.

Why should society trust the judgement of someone to change the course of a nation, but not trust them to take a drink for another 3 years? Why should they be allowed to make a life or death decision, like join the military, but not be able to make a decision to catch a buzz?

I agree, let's raise the voting and military age, lol.

Fair enough. Is that your true opinion? I'm looking for some real insight...

If someone's reasoning is that it is because of personal maturity and responsibility, then it would be hypocritical to allow for military admission or voting, but not drinking.

If arguments are based on liver and brain development, then that does not relate to voting or military admission.

So, do the liver and brain develop at different rates from ages 18-21? Well, perhaps the brain, but certainly not the liver. Also, you don't believe the brain should be fully developed before someone is allowed to vote?

I don't think the worries are about the liver/cirrhosis, but rather the maturity that differs between the ages of 18-21. The cost of permitting are greater than the benefits.

Exactly, so surely the cost of allowing these semi adults to fight and vote must be greater than the benefits. My point is, either you are an adult or you're not. What is the answer? If it is yes, then you should be legally allowed to make the adult decision to drink alcohol. If not, then you should not be able to fight and die for your country and especially not vote for the people who govern the rest of us real adults.
Ore_Ele
Posts: 25,980
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/10/2010 3:02:13 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 11/10/2010 2:37:01 PM, gavin.ogden wrote:
At 11/10/2010 2:30:56 PM, OreEle wrote:
At 11/10/2010 2:24:33 PM, gavin.ogden wrote:
At 11/10/2010 2:22:40 PM, OreEle wrote:
At 11/10/2010 2:19:43 PM, gavin.ogden wrote:
At 11/10/2010 2:17:20 PM, OreEle wrote:
At 11/10/2010 2:13:26 PM, gavin.ogden wrote:
If you can vote for our policy makers, you should be able to buy a drink. Opinions?

I don't see how those logically tie together.

Why should society trust the judgement of someone to change the course of a nation, but not trust them to take a drink for another 3 years? Why should they be allowed to make a life or death decision, like join the military, but not be able to make a decision to catch a buzz?

I agree, let's raise the voting and military age, lol.

Fair enough. Is that your true opinion? I'm looking for some real insight...

If someone's reasoning is that it is because of personal maturity and responsibility, then it would be hypocritical to allow for military admission or voting, but not drinking.

If arguments are based on liver and brain development, then that does not relate to voting or military admission.

So, do the liver and brain develop at different rates from ages 18-21? Well, perhaps the brain, but certainly not the liver. Also, you don't believe the brain should be fully developed before someone is allowed to vote?

The brain does develop at different rates for different people, generally finishes in early 20s, some research indicates that it could be as late as 25 - 30. Some people probably are developed earlier, but the law has to set a measurable number, or test everyone brain development.
"Wanting Red Rhino Pill to have gender"
gavin.ogden
Posts: 1,729
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/10/2010 3:10:20 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 11/10/2010 3:02:13 PM, OreEle wrote:
At 11/10/2010 2:37:01 PM, gavin.ogden wrote:
At 11/10/2010 2:30:56 PM, OreEle wrote:
At 11/10/2010 2:24:33 PM, gavin.ogden wrote:
At 11/10/2010 2:22:40 PM, OreEle wrote:
At 11/10/2010 2:19:43 PM, gavin.ogden wrote:
At 11/10/2010 2:17:20 PM, OreEle wrote:
At 11/10/2010 2:13:26 PM, gavin.ogden wrote:
If you can vote for our policy makers, you should be able to buy a drink. Opinions?

I don't see how those logically tie together.

Why should society trust the judgement of someone to change the course of a nation, but not trust them to take a drink for another 3 years? Why should they be allowed to make a life or death decision, like join the military, but not be able to make a decision to catch a buzz?

I agree, let's raise the voting and military age, lol.

Fair enough. Is that your true opinion? I'm looking for some real insight...

If someone's reasoning is that it is because of personal maturity and responsibility, then it would be hypocritical to allow for military admission or voting, but not drinking.

If arguments are based on liver and brain development, then that does not relate to voting or military admission.

So, do the liver and brain develop at different rates from ages 18-21? Well, perhaps the brain, but certainly not the liver. Also, you don't believe the brain should be fully developed before someone is allowed to vote?

The brain does develop at different rates for different people, generally finishes in early 20s, some research indicates that it could be as late as 25 - 30. Some people probably are developed earlier, but the law has to set a measurable number, or test everyone brain development.

Right, son is the number 18 or 21? I'm trying to get to the bottom of this thing. Other countries understand that if you are an adult, you have the same rights as all other adults until you prove otherwise(via crime). Also, I believe someone else's vote affects ME much more than some 19 year old indulging in a beer.
innomen
Posts: 10,052
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/10/2010 3:10:43 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 11/10/2010 3:00:26 PM, gavin.ogden wrote:
At 11/10/2010 2:47:04 PM, innomen wrote:
At 11/10/2010 2:37:01 PM, gavin.ogden wrote:
At 11/10/2010 2:30:56 PM, OreEle wrote:
At 11/10/2010 2:24:33 PM, gavin.ogden wrote:
At 11/10/2010 2:22:40 PM, OreEle wrote:
At 11/10/2010 2:19:43 PM, gavin.ogden wrote:
At 11/10/2010 2:17:20 PM, OreEle wrote:
At 11/10/2010 2:13:26 PM, gavin.ogden wrote:
If you can vote for our policy makers, you should be able to buy a drink. Opinions?

I don't see how those logically tie together.

Why should society trust the judgement of someone to change the course of a nation, but not trust them to take a drink for another 3 years? Why should they be allowed to make a life or death decision, like join the military, but not be able to make a decision to catch a buzz?

I agree, let's raise the voting and military age, lol.

Fair enough. Is that your true opinion? I'm looking for some real insight...

If someone's reasoning is that it is because of personal maturity and responsibility, then it would be hypocritical to allow for military admission or voting, but not drinking.

If arguments are based on liver and brain development, then that does not relate to voting or military admission.

So, do the liver and brain develop at different rates from ages 18-21? Well, perhaps the brain, but certainly not the liver. Also, you don't believe the brain should be fully developed before someone is allowed to vote?

I don't think the worries are about the liver/cirrhosis, but rather the maturity that differs between the ages of 18-21. The cost of permitting are greater than the benefits.

Exactly, so surely the cost of allowing these semi adults to fight and vote must be greater than the benefits. My point is, either you are an adult or you're not. What is the answer? If it is yes, then you should be legally allowed to make the adult decision to drink alcohol. If not, then you should not be able to fight and die for your country and especially not vote for the people who govern the rest of us real adults.

My personal feelings are fairly libertarian, and i don't care so much about the age. However, playing devil's advocate on this is pretty easy. It really isn't fair, but it does make sense. Taking orders, fighting and shooting etc, seem to be perfect for an 18 y.o. However, making mature judgments on drinking and driving is different. The numbers show that 18 y.o.'s are not capable of making these decisions at least at levels that show damage done at higher levels. The cost of making them wait 3 years is what? What is the pain and suffering in having to wait?
Ore_Ele
Posts: 25,980
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/10/2010 3:20:12 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 11/10/2010 3:10:20 PM, gavin.ogden wrote:
At 11/10/2010 3:02:13 PM, OreEle wrote:
The brain does develop at different rates for different people, generally finishes in early 20s, some research indicates that it could be as late as 25 - 30. Some people probably are developed earlier, but the law has to set a measurable number, or test everyone brain development.

Right, son is the number 18 or 21? I'm trying to get to the bottom of this thing. Other countries understand that if you are an adult, you have the same rights as all other adults until you prove otherwise(via crime). Also, I believe someone else's vote affects ME much more than some 19 year old indulging in a beer.

We all know that alcohol effects the brain (both long term and short term). When the brain is not fully developed, it is effected more, by less. Meaning that less alcohol will impare their minds more (not to mention that they often have lower body weights still, so the alcohol hits harder because of that too). That, added to the fact that teens (and many 20's year olds) make other poor choices (anecdotal, but my roomate thought it would be fun to drunk call his own mother, kind of forgetting that she is paying all his bills because he has no money, except to buy alcohol of course) of those poor choices comes increased rates of drunk driving (which teens are already statistically worse drivers, alcohol just adds to that).
"Wanting Red Rhino Pill to have gender"
innomen
Posts: 10,052
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/10/2010 3:28:03 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
If it makes you feel any better, i think it would be best for the country if they increased the age for voting to 45 :-P
Ore_Ele
Posts: 25,980
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/10/2010 3:30:20 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 11/10/2010 3:28:03 PM, innomen wrote:
If it makes you feel any better, i think it would be best for the country if they increased the age for voting to 45 :-P

I think there should be a voting test, like a driving test. But I probably only like that because I hate un-educated masses voting because of meaningless 15 second catch phrases and attack ads.
"Wanting Red Rhino Pill to have gender"
gavin.ogden
Posts: 1,729
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/10/2010 3:32:34 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 11/10/2010 3:20:12 PM, OreEle wrote:
At 11/10/2010 3:10:20 PM, gavin.ogden wrote:
At 11/10/2010 3:02:13 PM, OreEle wrote:
The brain does develop at different rates for different people, generally finishes in early 20s, some research indicates that it could be as late as 25 - 30. Some people probably are developed earlier, but the law has to set a measurable number, or test everyone brain development.

Right, son is the number 18 or 21? I'm trying to get to the bottom of this thing. Other countries understand that if you are an adult, you have the same rights as all other adults until you prove otherwise(via crime). Also, I believe someone else's vote affects ME much more than some 19 year old indulging in a beer.

We all know that alcohol effects the brain (both long term and short term). When the brain is not fully developed, it is effected more, by less. Meaning that less alcohol will impare their minds more (not to mention that they often have lower body weights still, so the alcohol hits harder because of that too). That, added to the fact that teens (and many 20's year olds) make other poor choices (anecdotal, but my roomate thought it would be fun to drunk call his own mother, kind of forgetting that she is paying all his bills because he has no money, except to buy alcohol of course) of those poor choices comes increased rates of drunk driving (which teens are already statistically worse drivers, alcohol just adds to that).

It is already illegal to drink and drive. I believe that the penalties for such a crime should be efficient to curb it. If they are adults when they are 18, then they may decide to ruin their own life by drinking and driving. We already know alcohol is dangerous.
gavin.ogden
Posts: 1,729
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/10/2010 3:48:55 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 11/10/2010 3:30:20 PM, OreEle wrote:
At 11/10/2010 3:28:03 PM, innomen wrote:
If it makes you feel any better, i think it would be best for the country if they increased the age for voting to 45 :-P

I think there should be a voting test, like a driving test. But I probably only like that because I hate un-educated masses voting because of meaningless 15 second catch phrases and attack ads.

Ah, now that is a great idea. A test on the issues. If yoo don't know the issues, you don't get to vote. I like it.
innomen
Posts: 10,052
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/10/2010 3:56:47 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 11/10/2010 3:30:20 PM, OreEle wrote:
At 11/10/2010 3:28:03 PM, innomen wrote:
If it makes you feel any better, i think it would be best for the country if they increased the age for voting to 45 :-P

I think there should be a voting test, like a driving test. But I probably only like that because I hate un-educated masses voting because of meaningless 15 second catch phrases and attack ads.

Those tests were deemed unconstitutional some time ago. But i get ya. I'd be happy if they just checked my ID.
innomen
Posts: 10,052
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/10/2010 4:01:18 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 11/10/2010 3:32:34 PM, gavin.ogden wrote:
At 11/10/2010 3:20:12 PM, OreEle wrote:
At 11/10/2010 3:10:20 PM, gavin.ogden wrote:
At 11/10/2010 3:02:13 PM, OreEle wrote:
The brain does develop at different rates for different people, generally finishes in early 20s, some research indicates that it could be as late as 25 - 30. Some people probably are developed earlier, but the law has to set a measurable number, or test everyone brain development.

Right, son is the number 18 or 21? I'm trying to get to the bottom of this thing. Other countries understand that if you are an adult, you have the same rights as all other adults until you prove otherwise(via crime). Also, I believe someone else's vote affects ME much more than some 19 year old indulging in a beer.

We all know that alcohol effects the brain (both long term and short term). When the brain is not fully developed, it is effected more, by less. Meaning that less alcohol will impare their minds more (not to mention that they often have lower body weights still, so the alcohol hits harder because of that too). That, added to the fact that teens (and many 20's year olds) make other poor choices (anecdotal, but my roomate thought it would be fun to drunk call his own mother, kind of forgetting that she is paying all his bills because he has no money, except to buy alcohol of course) of those poor choices comes increased rates of drunk driving (which teens are already statistically worse drivers, alcohol just adds to that).

It is already illegal to drink and drive. I believe that the penalties for such a crime should be efficient to curb it.
Statistics would not suggest this to be true.
If they are adults when they are 18, then they may decide to ruin their own life by drinking and driving. We already know alcohol is dangerous.
It usually works out that the driver is fine, but those they involve die.
Ore_Ele
Posts: 25,980
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/10/2010 4:23:03 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 11/10/2010 3:32:34 PM, gavin.ogden wrote:
At 11/10/2010 3:20:12 PM, OreEle wrote:
At 11/10/2010 3:10:20 PM, gavin.ogden wrote:
At 11/10/2010 3:02:13 PM, OreEle wrote:
The brain does develop at different rates for different people, generally finishes in early 20s, some research indicates that it could be as late as 25 - 30. Some people probably are developed earlier, but the law has to set a measurable number, or test everyone brain development.

Right, son is the number 18 or 21? I'm trying to get to the bottom of this thing. Other countries understand that if you are an adult, you have the same rights as all other adults until you prove otherwise(via crime). Also, I believe someone else's vote affects ME much more than some 19 year old indulging in a beer.

We all know that alcohol effects the brain (both long term and short term). When the brain is not fully developed, it is effected more, by less. Meaning that less alcohol will impare their minds more (not to mention that they often have lower body weights still, so the alcohol hits harder because of that too). That, added to the fact that teens (and many 20's year olds) make other poor choices (anecdotal, but my roomate thought it would be fun to drunk call his own mother, kind of forgetting that she is paying all his bills because he has no money, except to buy alcohol of course) of those poor choices comes increased rates of drunk driving (which teens are already statistically worse drivers, alcohol just adds to that).

It is already illegal to drink and drive. I believe that the penalties for such a crime should be efficient to curb it. If they are adults when they are 18, then they may decide to ruin their own life by drinking and driving. We already know alcohol is dangerous.

How often does a drunk person (especially a kid) think about the consequences of their actions? That is the problem with severe mind altering substances.

This ends up boiling down to whether one believes that the law should be reactive or preventive (arrest people after they commit a crime or prevent them from commiting the crime in the first place).
"Wanting Red Rhino Pill to have gender"
Ore_Ele
Posts: 25,980
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/10/2010 4:24:44 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 11/10/2010 3:56:47 PM, innomen wrote:
At 11/10/2010 3:30:20 PM, OreEle wrote:
At 11/10/2010 3:28:03 PM, innomen wrote:
If it makes you feel any better, i think it would be best for the country if they increased the age for voting to 45 :-P

I think there should be a voting test, like a driving test. But I probably only like that because I hate un-educated masses voting because of meaningless 15 second catch phrases and attack ads.

Those tests were deemed unconstitutional some time ago. But i get ya.

Another reason I don't like the general concept of a constitution, but that is an entirely different topic.

I'd be happy if they just checked my ID.

We kind of have that in Oregon. We vote by mail and you have to sign your vote, and it has to match with your signature on record. Not exactly an "ID" but it is some kind of matching system.
"Wanting Red Rhino Pill to have gender"
Ore_Ele
Posts: 25,980
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/10/2010 4:27:37 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 11/10/2010 3:48:55 PM, gavin.ogden wrote:
At 11/10/2010 3:30:20 PM, OreEle wrote:
At 11/10/2010 3:28:03 PM, innomen wrote:
If it makes you feel any better, i think it would be best for the country if they increased the age for voting to 45 :-P

I think there should be a voting test, like a driving test. But I probably only like that because I hate un-educated masses voting because of meaningless 15 second catch phrases and attack ads.

Ah, now that is a great idea. A test on the issues. If yoo don't know the issues, you don't get to vote. I like it.

I'd actually just prefer people have to pass a standard logic and reasoning test. A test on issues could be (IMO) too easily manipulated to stop people from voting that don't agree with you (really, any test could be, theoretically).

And of course, when I say logic, I don't mean "do you think God exists?" "Yes" "Then you are illogical, you can't vote." or anything like that. But make sure people know basic cause and effect and different types of fallacies that are common in political campaigns.

Anyway, this is also somewhat off topic.
"Wanting Red Rhino Pill to have gender"
gavin.ogden
Posts: 1,729
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/10/2010 5:45:19 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 11/10/2010 4:27:37 PM, OreEle wrote:
At 11/10/2010 3:48:55 PM, gavin.ogden wrote:
At 11/10/2010 3:30:20 PM, OreEle wrote:
At 11/10/2010 3:28:03 PM, innomen wrote:
If it makes you feel any better, i think it would be best for the country if they increased the age for voting to 45 :-P

I think there should be a voting test, like a driving test. But I probably only like that because I hate un-educated masses voting because of meaningless 15 second catch phrases and attack ads.

Ah, now that is a great idea. A test on the issues. If yoo don't know the issues, you don't get to vote. I like it.

I'd actually just prefer people have to pass a standard logic and reasoning test. A test on issues could be (IMO) too easily manipulated to stop people from voting that don't agree with you (really, any test could be, theoretically).

And of course, when I say logic, I don't mean "do you think God exists?" "Yes" "Then you are illogical, you can't vote." or anything like that. But make sure people know basic cause and effect and different types of fallacies that are common in political campaigns.

Anyway, this is also somewhat off topic.

The topic evolved, as it is supposed to. I think the topic should have been, "At what age are you truly an adult?" Any takers?
Kleptin
Posts: 5,095
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/10/2010 5:53:13 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 11/10/2010 2:19:43 PM, gavin.ogden wrote:
Why should society trust the judgement of someone to change the course of a nation, but not trust them to take a drink for another 3 years? Why should they be allowed to make a life or death decision, like join the military, but not be able to make a decision to catch a buzz?

Because you're only allowed to vote once during a particular election. 18 year olds tend not to know moderation.
: At 5/2/2010 2:43:54 PM, innomen wrote:
It isn't about finding a theory, philosophy or doctrine and thinking it's the answer, but a practical application of one's experiences that is the answer.

: At 10/28/2010 2:40:07 PM, jharry wrote: I have already been given the greatest Gift that anyone could ever hope for [Life], I would consider myself selfish if I expected anything more.
gavin.ogden
Posts: 1,729
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/10/2010 5:57:24 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 11/10/2010 5:53:13 PM, Kleptin wrote:
At 11/10/2010 2:19:43 PM, gavin.ogden wrote:
Why should society trust the judgement of someone to change the course of a nation, but not trust them to take a drink for another 3 years? Why should they be allowed to make a life or death decision, like join the military, but not be able to make a decision to catch a buzz?

Because you're only allowed to vote once during a particular election. 18 year olds tend not to know moderation.

And the service members?
Kleptin
Posts: 5,095
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/10/2010 6:01:24 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 11/10/2010 5:57:24 PM, gavin.ogden wrote:
And the service members?

Shouldn't drink while on duty anyway. They should be allowed to vote, though.
: At 5/2/2010 2:43:54 PM, innomen wrote:
It isn't about finding a theory, philosophy or doctrine and thinking it's the answer, but a practical application of one's experiences that is the answer.

: At 10/28/2010 2:40:07 PM, jharry wrote: I have already been given the greatest Gift that anyone could ever hope for [Life], I would consider myself selfish if I expected anything more.
Ore_Ele
Posts: 25,980
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/10/2010 6:01:42 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 11/10/2010 5:45:19 PM, gavin.ogden wrote:
At 11/10/2010 4:27:37 PM, OreEle wrote:
At 11/10/2010 3:48:55 PM, gavin.ogden wrote:
At 11/10/2010 3:30:20 PM, OreEle wrote:
At 11/10/2010 3:28:03 PM, innomen wrote:
If it makes you feel any better, i think it would be best for the country if they increased the age for voting to 45 :-P

I think there should be a voting test, like a driving test. But I probably only like that because I hate un-educated masses voting because of meaningless 15 second catch phrases and attack ads.

Ah, now that is a great idea. A test on the issues. If yoo don't know the issues, you don't get to vote. I like it.

I'd actually just prefer people have to pass a standard logic and reasoning test. A test on issues could be (IMO) too easily manipulated to stop people from voting that don't agree with you (really, any test could be, theoretically).

And of course, when I say logic, I don't mean "do you think God exists?" "Yes" "Then you are illogical, you can't vote." or anything like that. But make sure people know basic cause and effect and different types of fallacies that are common in political campaigns.

Anyway, this is also somewhat off topic.

The topic evolved, as it is supposed to. I think the topic should have been, "At what age are you truly an adult?" Any takers?

If we want to go that route, then it is really a personal time, different people mature at different rates, however the state has to have kind of line that says "these people are, these people are not" we can't have a large gray middle. And that line should be able to adjust based on how different generations age. Some generations may mature faster, some slower, mainly due to social climates (both that the government offers and parental mindsets).

If a generation is not maturing as fast as the last one, the government should be able to move that line back a couple of years, and if a generation is maturing faster, then the government should be free to move the line up.
"Wanting Red Rhino Pill to have gender"